- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Geschichte (talk) 08:52, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Pritika Swarup (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
promotional article on non-notable model moved directly from draft by the new contributor in an evasion of the purpose of AFC. The refs are the usual promotional interviews for the field, and are not RSs. For example, the Marie Claire "article" was 99% written by the subject (or perhaps their press agent) The NY Post article is a somewhat more sophisticated version because they seem to have rewritten the text instead of putting it in quotations, but its apparent purpose is to showcase the photos, complete with prices for the clothing. Harpers Bazaar uses some of the same photos, but is devoted to advertising a different set of products, again complete with prices and purchase links. DGG ( talk ) 00:21, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. It includes what commercials she’s been in more than about her. Should get deleted, or should be improved by someone. No sources? I’m not choosing speedy deletion, because there’s a chance that someone can step in to improve this article. Vamsi20 (talk) 00:45, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 03:40, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 03:40, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
- Delete the sourcing does not indicate this model is notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:01, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
- Delete Bah, I want to keep this one because she's gorgeous and has seemingly used her position to benefit others. The sources provided feel too much like a commercial or belong in the feel good section of the local newspaper. Her vibes are wonderful but I'm leaning delete. Still looking through a search to find anything that would offer hope of passing GNG. --ARoseWolf (Talk) 18:17, 6 January 2021 (UTC) Edited to delete. I can't make it work. Beautiful person and hopefully someone picks up on her charity work and writes more. --ARoseWolf (Talk) 18:27, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
- Delete — like Johnpacklambert already stated there isn’t just enough solid sources that substantiates or proves her notability. Celestina007 (talk) 18:35, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
- Comment Also, why does it say she studied in an Ivy League school instead of the actual university name? On Wikipedia, every point must have to source to back it up. Still leaning for delete. Edit: I would lean for keep if somebody improved it (not me, I don’t know things about this model). And whoever improves the article should add proper, reliable sourcing. Vamsi20 (talk) 20:05, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
- Delete per nom fails WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 01:36, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.